https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/ca...ornia-ban-on-high-capacity-magazines/2385442/ Well knock me over with a feather - a reasonable, rational gun control ruling from the 9th circuit. Never thought I'd see the day. Can't wait for the anti-gun left to appeal this to the USSC.
Equally unconstitutional slop... You won't have to wait long... Or I read they can go En Banc... I don't know what the full makeup of the 9th district court is, but you guys aren't having the best time with full courts, are ya?
I don't generally care enough about this topic to follow up when this decision is overturned somewhere, so I'll just say "I told ya so" now, and leave it to you to look it up in a few months...
This is how Democrats would exercise their power, if they could. The main reason they can't is we'll shoot them if they try. Thus, their gun control agenda.
There is nothing unconstitutional about the ruling in question. Perhaps. Or perhaps the state of California will have to accept the same loss as the district of columbia and the state of New York with their own firearm-related restrictions, and not pursue an appeal on the grounds of what a defeat could mean at the national level. If the verdict is appealed and higher courts do not overturn it, all magazine limitations across the united states will be overturned simultaneously. They will literally lose absolutely everything across every state.
By higher court, you mean the USSC - and yes, if it upholds the decision, every magazine ban in the country will disappear.
I disagree with your first point, but you make an interesting point below.. Nonetheless, I suspect they'll go forward with a full appeal, since it's complete nonsense.. I don't need to be an appellate judge to make that determination... SNIP California's ban on magazines holding more than 10 bullets “strikes at the core of the Second Amendment — the right to armed self-defense.” ENDSNIP Utter bullshit...
And yet it is not possible for yourself to explain why this ruling would qualify as being unconstitutional. Otherwise an effort at doing such would have already been made.
Only because the Democrats in Congress - somehow - couldn't deliver one to his desk. Had they, he couldn't sign them fast enough. You know this to be true.
Because such legislation never made it to his desk. Which the ATF said did not convert semi-automatic firearms to fully-automatic firearms. The matter was a lose/lose scenario no matter what course of action was taken. There was no way out of it either one way or the other.
The "bump-stock ban" had no impact on gun owners at all. It was a political show vote. Probably a minor mistake for Trump.